Design and synthesis of a series of novel, cationic liposaccharide derivatives as potential penetration enhancers for oral drug delivery

Article abstract of DOI:10.1016/j.tet.2009.08.072

Oral delivery remains a challenge for a number of drug candidates with low absorption profile (poor membrane permeability, lack of stability, solubility issues or susceptibility to enzymatic degradation) and various methodologies have been investigated to

Full text of DOI:10.1016/j.tet.2009.08.072

Tetrahedron 65 (2009) 9436–9442
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Tetrahedron
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tet
Design and synthesis of a series of novel, cationic liposaccharide derivatives
as potential penetration enhancers for oral drug delivery
,b,
Adel S. Abdelrahim a, Zyta M. Ziora b, Julie A. Bergeon a, Anne R. Moss a, Istvan Toth a
*
a The University of Queensland, School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia
b The University of Queensland, Centre for Integrated Preclinical Drug Development (CIPDD), TetraQ-Pharmaceutics, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 7 May 2009
Received in revised form 11 August 2009
Accepted 28 August 2009
Available online 1 September 2009
Oral delivery remains a challenge for a number of drug candidates with low absorption profile (poor
membrane permeability, lack of stability, solubility issues or susceptibility to enzymatic degradation) and
various methodologies have been investigated to overcome it. The approach presented here consists of
associating, by ion-pairing, a hydrophilic, ionizable model drug to a series of synthetic counter-ionic
entities with a controlled degree of lipophilicity in order to enhance its penetration of biomembranes
and offer some protection against in situ degradation, while preserving its biologically active chemical
structure. We report herein the synthesis of a series of positively charged potential penetration en-
Keywords:
Oral drug delivery
Lipoamino acid
Penetration enhancer
Ion-pairing
hancers designed from D-glucose, 2-aminododecanoic acid, and additional lipophilic amino acids, and
converted afterward into quaternary ammoniums in an optimized, innovative one-step reaction. Each
liposaccharide derivative synthesized was fully characterized and their ability to generate micelles in
solution was assessed by isothermal titration calorimetry.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
previously reported improvement in permeability and absorption
of
b-lactam antibiotics when associated with cationic lipophilic
Oral delivery is the method of choice for drug administration as
it generally results in lower production costs, ease of administra-
tion, and better patient compliance. Unfortunately, a large number
of molecules with promising therapeutic potential fail to reach the
oral drug market by lack of absorption and poor oral bioavailability,
leading to their abandonment in early clinical or research phase, or
to their development for parenteral administration only. Often, this
poor bioavailability is linked to high hydrophilicity and/or low
enzymatic resistance and common approaches to overcome these
issues aim at increasing the lipophilicity of these molecules (log P),
thereby facilitating their penetration across the intestinal epithe-
lium by passive diffusion.1–3
Improvements to the lipophilicity can be achieved by chemically
modifying the structure of the active compound (derivation by
esterification or lipidation, for example), which can also lead to
improved resistance to enzymatic degradation, however addition-
ally carries the risk of altering the overall biological properties
(reduction or loss of activity).4
entities such as quaternary ammonium bromides or chlorides. Re-
cently, we investigated the effect of a series of positively charged
glucolipids on the membrane permeability of piperacillin in Caco-2
monolayers, a common in vitro model of intestinal epithelium.8
Significant increases in apparent permeability coefficients were
observed, notably with a glucose-based derivative containing a 12-
carbon long lipid chain, however the permeability values were still
low (<10ꢀ6 cm sꢀ1), indicating that if administered orally, these
formulations would unlikely be fully absorbed.9 Furthermore, the
pH gradient residing in the gastro-intestinal tract might cause the
drug–glucolipid entities to dissociate as one of the residue could be
partially neutralized, negatively affecting the permeability en-
hancing effect of the designed glucolipids.
In an attempt to design more suitable and efficient li-
posaccharide-based penetration enhancers, a novel series of com-
pounds were synthesized. Based on our in vitro results, the
D-glucose unit was preserved as well as the dodecanoic (C12) li-
poamino acid residue. An additional lipophilic moiety, namely
leucine, phenylalanine (two of the most lipophilic natural amino
acids)y or a second C12, was introduced. The N-terminal amino
group was then converted into a quaternary ammonium, hence
An alternative consists in formulating the active compound
with penetration enhancing excipients, such as surfactants or
ion-pairing agents.5,6 Ross et al.7 and Mrestani et al.2 have
y
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ617 33469892; fax: þ617 33654273.
E-mail address: i.toth@uq.edu.au (I. Toth).
http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/life-science/metabolomics/learning-center/ami-
no-acid-reference-chart.html.
0040-4020/$ – see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tet.2009.08.072

A.S. Abdelrahim et al. / Tetrahedron 65 (2009) 9436–9442
9437
ensuring that the resulting cationic liposaccharide derivative re-
mains positively charged in basic conditions (intestine). The am-
photeric character of the designed charged liposaccharides is
responsible for their surfactant propertiesdhence their alternative
descriptive of ‘sugar surfactants’dbut also makes them prone to
aggregate or micellize in solution.10,11 Measurements by isothermal
titration calorimetry (ITC) were therefore performed to determine
the critical aggregate concentration (CAC) of each entity. Energy
accelerate the O–N-acyl migration when utilized in polar solvents
such as methanol.19 Anion exchange Amberlite resin IRA-400[HOꢀ]
was considered as an alternative to carry out the deacetylation of
amines 6a–c,20 but did not prevent the formation of the acetamide
by-product.
We then looked at ways to perform both the deacetylation and
the alkylation into ammoniums in one step. The use of an excess of
alkyl halide in the presence of inorganic bases such as K2CO3 or
NaOH was attempted;21,22 however, the organic and inorganic salts
generated by this method proved very difficult to separate, due to
comparable solubility in most common solvents. Another method
published by Cowling et al.23 reported using the sterically hindered
organic base 2,6-lutidine to generate methylated quaternary am-
monium derivatives from amines, but this proved unsuccessful
when attempted with compounds 6a–c.
parameters were also calculateddenthalpy of micellization (
DH),
entropy ( S), and Gibbs free energy ( G).
D
D
2. Results and discussion
2.1. Chemistry
We therefore developed an easy, practical methodology to pre-
pare our target methylated quaternary ammoniums by reacting ex-
cess methyl iodide in the presence of Amberlite resin IRA-400[HOꢀ]
in methanol. This novel approach allows both reactions (deacetyla-
tion and alkylation) to be carried out simultaneously and requires
only a simple filtration to remove the resin. The excess methyl iodide
was evaporated along with the solvent to afford the titled products in
nearly quantitative yields. Additionally, the Amberlite resin can
easily be reused after regeneration with 1 M NaOH and distilled
water. Ammoniums 7a–c were prepared following this new method
and later lyophilized from acetonitrile/water.
The series of liposaccharide derivatives were prepared in six
steps from peracetylated
-glucosyl azide 112 as presented in
b-D
Scheme 1. The tributylphosphine used as a reducing agent by
Falconer et al.12 to yield peracetylated glucose amine 2, and later its
Boc-protected conjugate 3, proved to yield several by-products,
relatively difficult to isolate, hence a new coupling pathway was
investigated. The azido residue was reduced by catalytic hydroge-
nation to afford
b
-
D
-glucosyl amine 2, which was next reacted
with (R,S)-Na-Boc-dodecanoic acid (Boc-C12
)
in the presence
of diisopropylethylamine (DIPEA) and O-benzotriazole-N,N,N0,N0-
tetramethyl-uronium-hexafluoro-phosphate (HBTU).12,13 The tert-
butyloxycarbonyl protecting group was then removed with
trifluoroacetic acid to yield amine 4 in nearly quantitative yield. The
coupling of the second amino acid residue was performed similarly
to give the peracetylated diastereomeric liposaccharide derivatives
6a–c, with yields ranging from 59 to 65%. Due to the reactivity of the
free amino residues with the acetyl group present on the glucose
scaffold, compounds 6a–c were subsequently used without further
purification.
2.2. Critical aggregation concentration (CAC)
Since the designed liposaccharide derivatives possess both hy-
drophilic and lipophilic moieties, they are susceptible to either
aggregation or micellization under aqueous conditions, which
could potentially influence their interactions with the drugs they
would be associated to, both ex vivo and in situ. Determining their
critical aggregation concentration (CAC) in aqueous solution was
therefore an important step in predicting the type of interactions
which would occur when associating the liposaccharide derivative
to a model drug. In the sub-aggregate range of concentrations, ion-
General O-deacetylation methods report the use of bases such
as NH314 or triethylamine15 in methanol, NaOH/pyridine/ethanol,16
K2CO3 in methanol,17 and various alkali,18 e.g., sodium methoxide
´
(Zemplen conditions). However, these conventional bases tend to
Scheme 1. Synthesis of a series of positively charged liposaccharide derivatives and subsequent quaternisation. Reagents and conditions: (a) H2, 10% Pd/C, DCM, 12 h; (b) Na-Boc-
aminododecanoic acid (1.75 equiv), HBTU 2 equiv, DIPEA (3.5 equiv), DCM, 24 h; (c) TFA/DCM (1:1), 1 h; (d) Na-Boc-NH–CH(R)–COOH (2 equiv), HBTU (2.2 equiv), DIPEA (4 equiv),
DCM, 24 h; (e) CH3I, CH3OH, Amberlite IRA-400[HOꢀ], 48 h.

9438
A.S. Abdelrahim et al. / Tetrahedron 65 (2009) 9436–9442
pairing is usually a favored process, despite possibilities of pre-
micellar aggregation.
Characterization of the aggregates was also attempted sepa-
rately using Zetasizer measurements in water (results not shown).
The high polydispersity indexes observed in the broad range of
concentrations used for all liposaccharides (from 0.1 mM to 8 mM)
did not enable to conclude on the CAC of the aggregates formed.
The ITC findings can be related to the lipophilicity of the
designed molecules: using the log P predictor of ACD/Labs (v12.01)
estimates of partition coefficients values were obtained for 7a, 7b
and 7c, and found to be, respectively, 0.64 (ꢁ0.68),1.69 (ꢁ0.71), and
3.44 (ꢁ0.68); similar values were obtained with the ALogPS 2.1
program (Virtual Computational Chemistry Laboratory 2007).34
Based on these theoretical values, 7c would be more likely to
undergo aggregation in water-based media than 7a or 7b, owing to
its significantly higher lipophilicity.
When reaching the CAC and above, the hydrophobic intra-
molecular interactions between the lipid chains of the liposaccharide
derivatives become predominant and can lead to phenomena of
aggregation and/or micellization, both strongly impacting the
permeation into and through biological membranes.24–26
Measurements of CAC also provide some insights into the po-
tential toxicity of the designed penetration enhancers, notably
likelihood to cause disruptions to biological membranes due to
their surfactant properties.27,28
A number of quantification
methods of the critical micellar concentration (CMC) of ionic or
non-ionic surfactants in aqueous systems have been reported.29 In
a previous study on sugar/lipoamino acid conjugates, Ross et al.
determined the CMC of synthetic ionic surfactants using isothermal
titration calorimetry (ITC), a sensitive, routine method which ad-
ditionally provides access to thermodynamic parameters such as
enthalpy and entropy of micellization.7 Using a similar approach,
we conducted ITC measurements for compounds 7a–c in deionized
water; CAC values were then determined according to the method
of Van Os, where the CAC is represented by a change of slope in the
cumulative enthalpy plot.30
The calorimetric titration of 7c, comprising two C12 moieties, is
presented in Figure 1. The CAC value of 7c was found to be
0.275ꢁ0.010 mM, which is in agreement with the 0.01–10 mM
concentration range commonly observed for glycolipids.7,31–33
When examining conjugates 7a and 7b, variations in heat ex-
changed were detected but the enthalpy of aggregate formationwas so
low (<0.5 kcal molꢀ1) that the CAC could not be accurately estimated.
Modifications to the experimental conditions (injection volumes (5–
As mentioned above, ITC additionally allows direct observation
of enthalpy from the heat/titration plots. The measured enthalpy
reflects the contribution of individual interactions occurring be-
tween the liposaccharide molecules and is a function of compound
concentration (mM) in the calorimeter cell.
For 7c
D
Hmic was found to be ꢀ2.60ꢁ0.10 kcal molꢀ1
(ꢀ10.88ꢁ0.41 kJ molꢀ1). The negative sign indicates an exothermic
process in which intermolecular interactions between the aggre-
gating molecules overpower the solvation process. Negative en-
thalpy can generally be attributed to increased van der Waals and
hydrophobic interactions, which actively contribute to micelle
formation.35
To determine if the binding process observed is thermody-
namically favored, the Gibbs free energy of aggregation (
DGagg)
needs to be considered. It can be calculated by Eq. 1:
D
Gagg ¼ RT ln xCAC
(1)
15 mL) and duration (10–30 s), starting concentrations (4–8 mM)) did
not yield better results. It was hypothesized that either these two
liposaccharide derivatives did not aggregate or that the aggregates
formed were not stable enough in water to be detected by ITC.
where R is the gas constant (8.314 J Kꢀ1 molꢀ1), T the absolute
temperature (K), and xCAC the CAC value in mole fraction units.
Figure 1. Calorimetric titration of compound 7c, picturing the sequence of injections (left top panel) and enthalpy curve (left lower panel). Cumulative enthalpy values were then
plotted versus concentration (right) to determine the CAC (defined as the concentration at which the two tangents at the extremities of the curve intersect).7

A.S. Abdelrahim et al. / Tetrahedron 65 (2009) 9436–9442
9439
The negative value found for 7c, specifically
D
Gagg¼ꢀ7.52
Palladium (10% wt on carbon) was purchased from Lancaster
Synthesis (Lancashire, England) and Amberlite IR 400 [ꢀOH] was
provided by the British Drug Houses (BDH) Ltd (England). Ultra pure
gases (N2, H2, Ar) were supplied by BOC Gases (Brisbane, QLD,
Australia). Silica for flash chromatography (Silica gel 60, 230–400
mesh) was obtained from Lomb Scientific (Taren Point, NSW, Aus-
tralia). Deuterated solvents (d1-CDCl3 and DMSO-d6) were manu-
factured by Cambridge Isotope Laboratories Inc. (Andover, MA, USA).
All other reagents were purchased in analytical grade or higher
purity from Sigma–Aldrich (Castle Hill, NSW, Australia) or Merck Pty
(Kilsyth, VIC, Australia). Solvents were freshly distilled and dried
prior to use and all moisture-sensitive reactions were carried out
under inert atmosphere (N2/Ar) using oven-dried glassware.
Infrared measurements were performed on an IR spectrometer
Spectrum 2000 (Perkin Elmer Pty Ltd, Glen Waverley, VIC, Aus-
tralia), at a resolution of 4 cmꢀ1 ATR. 1H and 13C NMR were recorded
on a Bruker Avance 500 spectrometer (Bruker Biospin, Rheinstet-
ten, Germany) at 500 MHz and 298 K. Chemical shifts are reported
in parts per million (ppm) downfield from tetramethylsilane with
ꢁ0.03 kcal molꢀ1 (ꢀ31.46ꢁ0.12 kJ molꢀ1), shows that favorable
changes are occurring during the aggregation process, leading to
the formation of stabilized entities in the aqueous environment.
The determination of
DGagg and
DHagg leads to the calculation of
the entropy of micellization,
DSagg, using Eq. 2:
D
Hagg
ꢀ
D
Gagg
D
Sagg
¼
(2)
T
Like enthalpy, entropy is strongly dependent on temperature. In the
case of 7c,
D
Smic was found to be 15.9ꢁ0.4 cal Kꢀ1 molꢀ1
(66.5ꢁ1.6 J Kꢀ1 molꢀ1). The positive entropy change implies a de-
crease in the general degree of order in the system, which can be
partially explained by the desolvation process associated with the
pairing of molecules.36 The release of solvent molecules (water)
from the forming aggregates along with a reduction of the degree of
freedom of the aggregated amphiphiles usually leads to an increase
in entropy.37,38 The size and shape of the aggregates as well as their
distribution in the solvent could also influence the entropy.
chemical shifts referenced to the residual CHCl3 peak (
d 7.24 ppm)
When looking at ꢀT
DSmic though, the negative value returned
contributes to lowering the Gibbs free energy, thereby favoring
aggregation process.
or DMSO peak ( 2.50 ppm). Mass chromatograms were acquired in
d
acetonitrile/waterþ0.1% acetic acid on a PE Sciex API3000 triple
quadrupole mass spectrometer (Applied Biosystems/MDS Sciex,
Toronto, Canada) operating in positive-ion electrospray mode (ESI-
MS). Results were viewed using the Analyst 1.4 software provided.
High-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) data were obtained on
a Qstar Pulsar instrument (Applied Biosystems) operating in
positive-ion electrospray mode. Isothermal titration calorimetry
3. Conclusion
Three novel liposaccharide derivatives containing a quaternary
ammonium residue at the N-terminus were successfully prepared
using a novel, efficient strategy to carry out the glucose deacety-
lation and the quaternisation of the free amino group in one step
utilizing Amberlite IRA-400[HOꢀ] combined with excess alkyl ha-
lide. This methodology avoided the O–N-acyl migration side re-
action commonly observed when undertaking the deacetylation of
amino sugars and greatly simplified the isolation of the expected
products with no further purification required.
(ITC) experiments were conducted on
a MicroCal VP-ITC
calorimeter (MicroCal, Northampton, MA, USA) at 37 ꢂC in deion-
ized water (pH 6.0) and data computed using Origin software 5.0
and VP viewer 2000 software.
4.2. Synthesis
The ability of the synthesized amphiphilic molecules to aggregate
in aqueous solutionwas assessed by isothermal titration calorimetry.
The critical aggregation concentration and thermodynamics pa-
4.2.1. N-[2-(N0-tert-Butyloxycarbonyl)amino-
2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetyl- -glucopyranosyl amine (3). Peracetylated
-glucosyl azide (1) (1.00 g, 2.68 mmol) was dissolved in dry
D,L-dodecanoyl]-
b-D
b-D
rameters associated with the aggregation process (DGmic, DHmic and
dichloromethane (20 mL). Palladium catalyst (0.1 g, 10% on carbon)
was added and the mixture was stirred under hydrogen for 18 h.
Upon completion, the solution was filtered through Celite and
concentrated under reduced pressure to 20 mL. Separately, Na-Boc-
aminododecanoic acid34 (1.47 g, 4.67 mmol), HBTU (0.97 g,
5.13 mmol), and DIPEA (1.20 g, 1.62 mL, and 9.30 mmol) were dis-
solved in dry DCM (20 mL) and allowed to react for 15 min before
being added to the amine solution and stirred for 12 h at room
temperature. The solution was then evaporated and the residue
was washed successively with 5% HCl (2ꢃ50 mL), saturated solu-
tion of sodium bicarbonate (2ꢃ50 mL), brine (2ꢃ25 mL), dried over
MgSO4, and filtered off. The residual solvent was evaporated under
vacuum and the crude product was purified by column chroma-
tography to give 3 as a colorless oil (1.30 g, 76%); Rf¼0.29 ethyl
acetate/hexane 1:2 (v/v); ESI-MS, m/z: 645 [MþH]þ, 667 [MþNa]þ.
D
Smic) were determined for one of the liposaccharide derivatives, 7c,
comprising of two C12 moieties (aminododecanoic acid). The rela-
tively low CAC value found (0.275 mM) suggested a good aptitude of
that amphiphile to aggregate; this was confirmed by determination
of the thermodynamical parameters, which indicated a dual con-
tribution of both enthalpy and entropy to the aggregation process.
However, such results could not be experimentally obtained for the
other two liposaccharide derivatives, 7a and 7b, suggesting that ei-
ther aggregation was not occurring or that the aggregates formed
were not stable enough to be assessed.
Further investigations, including in vitro and in vivo evaluations,
of the synthesized liposaccharide derivatives will be carried out to
examine their biological effect when admixed to ionizable model
drugs and their capacity to act as potential oral penetration
enhancers.
1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d): 7.02–6.84 (1H, m, amide NH), 5.31–
5.18 (2H, m, H-1 and H-3 (sugar)), 5.01 (1H, t, J¼9.8 Hz, H-2 (sugar)),
4. Experimental section
4.91–4.86 (1H, m, H-5 (sugar)), 4.30–4.24 (1H, m, H-6a (sugar)),
4.02–4.01 (2H, m, H-6b (sugar) and
H-4 (sugar)), 2.01, 1.97, 1.96, 1.95 (12H, 4s, 4CH3CO (sugar)), 1.92–
1.68 (2H, m, -CH2 (lipid)), 1.44–1.41 (9H, m, Boc), 1.22–1.19 (16H,
m, 8CH2 (lipid)), 0.81 (3H, t, J¼6.7 Hz, CH3 (lipid)).
a-CH (LAA)), 3.82–3.77 (1H, m,
4.1. Chemicals and equipment
b
Peptide synthesis solvent, N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), and
reagents, trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) and diisopropylethylamine
(DIPEA), were purchased from Auspep (Melbourne, VIC, Australia).
O-Benzotriazole-N,N,N0,N0-tetramethyl-uronium-hexafluoro-phos-
phate (HBTU) and di-tert-butyl dicarbonate (Boc2O) were obtained
from GL Biochem Ltd (Shanghai, China). Na-Boc-protected amino
acids were supplied by Novabiochem (La¨ufelfingen, Switzerland).
4.2.2. N-(2-Amino- -dodecanoyl)-2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetyl-b-D-gluco-
D
,
L
pyranosyl amine (4). Compound 3 (1.93 g, 3.00 mmol) was dissolved
in DCM/TFA (50 mL, 1:1) and stirred for 1 h. The solvent was re-
moved under vacuum and the residue was left overnight under
vacuum to remove the excess TFA, then neutralized with aqueous

9440
A.S. Abdelrahim et al. / Tetrahedron 65 (2009) 9436–9442
sodium bicarbonate (25 mL), and extracted with DCM (100 mL) to
glucopyranosyl amine (5c). Compound 5c was prepared following
the procedure described for compound 5a, using Na-Boc-amino-
dodecanoic acid (0.78 g, 2.49 mmol) as starting material instead;
Rf¼0.3 ethyl acetate/hexane, 1:2 (v/v). The title product (1:1 mix-
ture of diastereomers) was isolated as a colorless oil by flash
chromatography (0.62 g, 68%); ESI-MS, m/z: 842 [MþH]þ, 864
yield 4 as a colorless oil (1.50 g, 92%); ESI-MS, MS, m/z: 545 [MþH]þ,
567 [MþNa]þ. 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d): 7.97–7.89 (1H, m,
amide NH), 5.31–5.18 (2H, m, H-1 and H-3 (sugar)), 5.09–4.93 (2H,
m, H-2 and H-5 (sugar)), 4.30–4.16 (1H, m, H-6a (sugar)), 4.14–4.08
(1H, m, H-6b (sugar)), 4.06–4.02 (1H, m, H-4 (sugar)), 3.82–3.77 (1H,
m,
1.82–1.79 (2H, m,
0.72 (3H, t, J¼6.7 Hz, CH3 (lipid)).
a-CH (lipid)), 2.11, 2.08, 2.06, 2.03 (12H, 4s, 4CH3CO (sugar)),
[MþNa]þ. IR (film):
¼3288, 3075, 2925, 2855, 1752, 1703, 1647,
g
b-CH2 (lipid)), 1.25–1.22 (16H, m, 8CH2 (lipid)),
1546, 1502, 1456, 1366, 1219, 1167, 1037, 982, 907, 865, 778, 698,
643, 598 cmꢀ1 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
. d): 6.86–6.59 (1H, m,
amide NH), 6.53–6.51 (1H, m, amide NH), 5.29–5.20 (2H, m, H-1
and H-3 (sugar)), 5.05–4.98 (2H, m, H-2 and H-5 (sugar)), 4.86–4.84
(1H, dd, J¼2.1, 1.8 Hz, H-6a (sugar)), 4.05–3.98 (3H, m, H-6b (sugar),
4.2.3. N-[2-(N0-(N00-(tert-Butyloxycarbonyl)-
decanoyl)]-2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetyl-
-glucopyranosyl amine (5a). Na-
L-leucyl) amino-D,L-do-
b-D
Boc-leucine (0.62 g, 2.49 mmol), HBTU (0.51 g, 2.69 mmol) and
DIPEA (0.86 mL, 4.96 mmol) were dissolved in dry DCM (50 mL) and
compound 4 (0.67 g, 1.23 mmol) was added. The reaction mixture
was stirred at room temperature for 12 h. After evaporation, the
residue was washed with 5% HCl solution (2ꢃ25 mL), aqueous so-
dium bicarbonate (2ꢃ25 mL) and brine (2ꢃ25 mL), dried over
MgSO4, and concentrated under vacuum. Purification by flash
chromatography (ethyl acetate/hexane 1:2þ1% triethylamine),
Rf¼0.3; (1:1 mixture of diastereomers) yielded 5a as a colorless oil
2a-CH (lipid)), 3.97–3.94 (1H, m, H-4 (sugar)), 2.01, 1.97, 1.96, 1.98
(12H, 4s, 4CH3CO (sugar)), 1.86–1.82 (2H, m,
1.54 (2H, m, -CH2 (lipid)), 1.46–1.42 (9H, m, C(CH3)3 (Boc)), 1.24–
1.21 (32H, m, 16CH2 (lipid)), 0.86–0.83 (6H, m, 2CH3 (lipid)). 13C
NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) ( ): 172.4, 172.1, 171.9, 170.9, 170.5, 170.4,
b-CH2 (lipid)), 1.56–
b
d
169.8, 169.7, 169.4, 78.2, 78.1, 78.0, 73.5, 72.8, 72.7, 72.5, 70.4, 70.1,
68.1, 68.0, 61.5, 61.5, 60.2, 53.2, 31.7, 31.3, 31.2, 29.4, 29.3, 29.3, 29.2,
29.1, 28.2, 28.1, 25.6, 25.5, 25.3, 25.2, 22.5, 20.9, 20.6, 20.6, 20.5,
20.4, 14.0, 13.9. HRMS calcd for C43H75N3Na: 864.5198, found:
864.5192.
(0.72 g, 65%). ESI-MS, m/z: 780 [MþNa]þ. IR (film):
¼3291, 2930,
g
2859, 1751, 1703, 1649, 1506, 1366, 1218, 1165, 1035, 907, 567,
598 cmꢀ1. 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d): 7.07–7.00 (1H, m, amide
4.2.6. N-[2-(N0-
tyl- -glucopyranosylamine (6a). Compound 5a (0.60 g, 0.79 mmol)
L-Leucyl)amino-D,L-dodecanoyl]-2,3,4,6-tetra-O-ace-
NH), 6.73–8.69 (1H, m, amide NH), 5.30–5.21 (2H, m, H-1 and H-3
(sugar)), 5.04–5.00 (1H, m, H-5 (sugar)), 4.92–4.88 (1H, m, H-2
b-D
was dissolved in TFA/DCM (1:1) and stirred for 1 h. The mixture was
diluted with DCM (50 mL), evaporated, and washed with sodium
bicarbonate solution (2ꢃ25 mL), the organic layer was separated,
dried over MgSO4, filtered, and evaporated under vacuum to yield
compound 6a as a colorless oil (0.48 g, 93%), 1:1 mixture of dia-
stereomers; Rf¼0.12 (ethyl acetate/hexane 4:1, ninhydrin dip); ESI-
(sugar)), 4.28–4.24 (2H, m, H-6a (sugar) and
(2H, m, H-6b (sugar), and -CH (Leu)), 3.81–3.76 (1H, m, H-4
(sugar)), 2.01, 1.97, 1.96, 1.98 (12H, 4s, 4CH3CO (sugar)), 1.82–1.79
(1H, m, CH(CH3)2 (Leu)), 1.75–1.74 (2H, m, -CH2 (lipid)), 1.64–1.59
(2H, m, -CH2 (lipid)), 1.41–1.39 (9H, m, C(CH3)3 (Boc)), 1.20–1.18
a-CH (lipid)), 4.04–4.08
a
b
b
(16H, m, 8CH2 (lipid)), 0.92–0.88 (6H, m, 2CH3 (Leu)), 0.83 (3H, t,
MS, m/z: 658 [MþH]þ. IR (film):
¼3292, 2955, 2923, 2854, 1659,
g
J¼6.7 Hz, CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d
): 172.7, 172.5,
1543, 1465, 1367, 1259, 1201, 1080, 1036, 889, 719, 651, 568 cmꢀ1. 1H
172.1, 172.0, 170.6, 170.4, 170.4, 169.7, 169.7, 169.3, 155.9, 155.8, 80.3,
80.1, 78.0, 77.9, 73.8, 73.5, 73.4, 72.7, 72.6, 70.4, 70.2, 68.1, 68.0, 67.6,
61.6, 61.5, 53.1, 52.7, 31.8, 31.7, 31.7, 31.6, 31.4, 29.4, 29.2, 29.1, 29.1,
28.2, 28.1, 25.1, 25.1, 24.5, 24.5, 22.9, 22.8, 22.5, 21.7, 21.6, 20.5, 20.4,
20.4, 13.9. HRMS calcd for C37H63N3Na: 780.4259, found: 780.4253.
NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (d): 7.64–7.63 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.17–7.14
(1H, m, amide NH), 5.29 (2H, s, NH2), 5.27–5.24 (2H, m, H-1 and H-3
(sugar)), 5.22–5.18 (1H, t, J¼9.4 Hz, H-2 (sugar)), 5.07–5.01 (1H, m,
H-5 (sugar)), 4.95–4.88 (1H, m, H-4 (sugar)), 4.33–4.24 (2H, m, H-6a
and H-6b (sugar)), 4.07–4.03 (1H, m,
a-CH (lipid)), 3.80–3.76 (1H, m,
a
-CH (Leu)), 2.01, 1.97, 1.96, 1.98 (12H, 4s, 4CH3CO (sugar)), 1.88–1.78
4. 2. 4. N-[2-(N0-(N00-(tert-Butyloxycarbonyl)-
alanyl)amino- -dodecanoyl)]-2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetyl-
L
-phenyl-
-glucopyr-
(2H, m, b-CH2 (Leu)), 1.71–1.69 (2H, m, b-CH2 (lipid)), 1.60–1.58 (1H,
D
,
L
b
-
D
m, CH(CH3)2 (Leu)), 1.32–1.23 (16H, m, 8CH2 (lipid)), 0.96–0.91 (6H,
anosyl amine (5b). Compound 5b was prepared following the
procedure described for compound 5a, using Na-Boc-phenylalanine
(0.66 g, 2.49 mmol) as starting material instead. Rf¼0.3 ethyl
acetate/hexane, 1:2 (v/v). The title product (1:1 mixture of dia-
stereomers) was isolated as a colorless oil by flash chromatography
(0.60 g, 62%); ESI-MS, m/z: 792 [MþH]þ, 814 [MþNa]þ. IR (film):
m, 2CH3 (Leu)), 0.86 (3H, t, J¼6.7 Hz, CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR (500 MHz,
CDCl3) (d): 176.2, 172.4, 172.2, 170.8, 170.6, 170.5, 170.5, 169.8, 169.7,
169.4, 169.3, 78.1, 78.0, 73.5, 73.52, 72.6, 72.6, 70.7, 70.1, 68.0, 61.5,
61.5, 53.3, 53.2, 52.5, 43.6, 43.2, 31.7, 30.5, 29.4, 29.40, 29.3, 29.2, 29.1,
29.0, 25.4, 25.3, 24.7, 23.2, 23.2, 22.5, 21.2, 20.6, 20.4, 13.9. HRMS
calcd for C32H56N3O11: 658.3915, found: 658.3909.
g
¼3316, 2927, 2856, 1748, 1687, 1651, 1529, 1453, 1367, 1219, 1167,
):
1035, 908, 743, 699, 599, 567 cmꢀ1. 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d
4.2.7. N-[2-(N0-
O-acetyl- -glucopyranosyl amine (6b). Compound 6b was pre-
L-Phenylalanyl)amino-D,L-dodecanoyl]-2,3,4,6-tetra-
7.33–7.22 (5H, m, Ph), 7.07–6.98 (1H, m, amide NH), 6.40–7.38 (1H,
m, amide NH), 5.32–5.26 (2H, m, H-1 and H-3 (sugar)), 5.18–5.11
(1H, m, H-5 (sugar)), 5.07 (1H, t, J¼11.6 Hz, H-2 (sugar)), 4.32–4.29
b-D
pared following the procedure described for compound 6a, using
compound 5b (2.00 g, 2.52 mmol) as a starting material instead;
Rf¼0.12 (ethyl acetate/hexane 4:1, ninhydrin dip); compound 6b
was obtained as a colorless oil in a 1:1 mixture of diastereomers
(1.65 g, 95%); ESI-MS, m/z: 692[MþH]þ, 714 [MþNa]þ. IR (film):
(3H, m, H-6a (sugar),
9.8 Hz, H-6b (sugar)), 3.80–3.75 (1H, m, H-4 (sugar)), 3.13–3.09 (2H,
m, CH2Ph), 2.01, 1.97, 1.96, 1.98 (12H, 4s, 4CH3CO (sugar)), 1.71–1.69
a
-CH (lipid)),
a
-CH (Phe), 4.09 (1H, dd, J¼11.6,
(2H, m,
b
-CH2 (lipid)), 1.44–1.41 (9H, m, C(CH3)3 (Boc)), 1.25–1.22
g
¼3305, 3062, 2925, 2855, 1747, 1652, 1530, 1438, 1368, 1220, 1034,
(16H, m, 8CH2 (lipid)), 0.81 (3H, t, J¼6.7 Hz, CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR
908, 844, 745, 699, 648, 599 cmꢀ1. 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d):
(500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d): 171.8, 171.6, 170.5, 170.4, 169.8, 169.4, 136.7,
7.33–7.32 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.7.31–7.29 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.28–
7.22 (5H, m, Ph), 5.58–522 (2H, m, H-1 and H-3 (sugar)), 4.99–4.90
(1H, t, J¼9.5 Hz, H-5 (sugar)), 4.56–4.49 (1H, t, J¼9.5 Hz, H-2
(sugar)), 4.35–4.24 (2H, m, H-6a and H-4 (sugar)), 4.05–3.84 (1H,
136.4, 129.2, 129.1, 129.0, 128.8, 128.7, 128.6, 127.2, 126.8, 126.5,
126.3, 126.0, 125.9, 125.1, 124.3, 80.4, 78.0, 75.5, 73.5, 73.4, 72.7,
72.6, 70.5, 70.2, 68.0, 61.5, 53.4, 31.7, 29.4, 29.2, 29.2, 29.1, 28.2, 28.1,
25.1, 22.5, 20.6, 20.5, 20.4. HRMS calcd for C39H61N5Na: 814.4204,
found: 814.4209.
dd, J¼2.3, 1.9 Hz, H-6b (sugar)), 3.78–3.64 (2H, m,
a
-CH (lipid) and
a-CH (Phe)), 3.13–3.05 (2H, m, CH2Ph), 2.03, 2.00,1.99,1.97 (12H, 4s,
4CH3CO (sugar)), 1.71–1.65 (2H, m, b-CH2 (lipid)), 1.26–1.23 (16H,
4.2.5. N-[2-(N0-(2-(N00-(tert-Butyloxycarbonyl)amino-
noyl)amino- -dodecanoyl))]-2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetyl-
D
,
L
-dodeca-
m, 8CH2 (lipid)), 0.84 (3H, t, J¼5.8 Hz, CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR
D
,
L
b
-
D
-
(500 MHz, CDCl3) (d): 174.8, 172.3, 172.1, 170.8, 170.6, 170.5, 170.1,

A.S. Abdelrahim et al. / Tetrahedron 65 (2009) 9436–9442
9441
169.8, 169.3, 169.3, 137.6, 137.2, 129.1, 129.0, 128.76, 128.70, 129.86,
126.82, 78.0, 74.0, 73.5, 73.5, 72.7, 72.6, 70.7, 70.2, 70.1, 68.7, 68.4,
68.1, 68.05, 68.02, 61.7, 61.5, 61.5, 31.7, 30.6, 29.4, 29.4, 29.3, 29.3,
29.2, 29.2, 29.18, 29.5, 25.3, 22.5, 20.6, 20.5, 20.5, 13.9. HRMS calcd
for C35H53N3NaO11: 714.3578, found: 714.3572.
(9H, s, 3CH3 (quatern)), 1.52–1.50 (2H, m,
b
-CH2 (lipid)), 1.24–1.21
(16H, m, 8CH2 (lipid)), 0.91 (3H, t, J¼10.8 Hz, CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR
(500 MHz, DMSO-d6) (d): 171.6, 164.9, 164.7, 164.72, 134.6, 129.7,
129.3, 129.2, 129.1, 128.7, 127.8, 127.6, 127.4, 80.1, 79.9, 79.0, 78.8,
77.7, 77.7, 74.7, 74.3, 72.8, 72.5, 70.2, 61.3, 61.2, 54.7, 54.7, 54.7, 53.5,
53.0, 52.4, 52.3, 52.1, 47.7, 32.4, 32.1, 31.9, 31.8, 31.6, 31.6, 29.4, 29.3,
29.32, 29.3, 29.2, 29.1, 29.09, 29.06, 29.00, 28.9, 25.2, 25.1, 24.9,
22.4, 14.3, 14.2. HRMS calcd for C30H52N3Oþ7: 566.3805, found:
566.3800.
4.2.8. N-[2-(N0-(2-Amino-
2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetyl- -glucopyranosyl amine (6c). Compound 6c
D,L-dodecanoyl)amino-D,L-dodecanoyl)]-
b-D
was prepared following the procedure described for compound 6a
using compound 5c (0.50 g, 0.59 mmol) as a starting material in-
stead; Rf¼0.12 (ethyl acetate/hexane, 4:1, ninhydrin dip); com-
pound 6c was obtained as a colorless oil in a 1:1 mixture of
diastereomers (0.41 g, 95%) of 6c; ESI-MS, MS, m/z: 742 [MþH]þ. IR
4.2.11. N-[2-(N0-(2-(N00,N00,N00-Trimethylamino))-
noyl)amino- -dodecanoyl]-2,3,4,6-tetrahydroxy- -glucopyranosyl
D,L-dodeca-
D
,
L
b-D
amine hydroxide (7c). Compound 7c was prepared by following the
procedure described for compound 7a using compound 6c (0.30 g,
0.40 mmol) as starting material instead, yielding 7c (1:1 mixture of
diastereomers) as a white powder (0.24 g, 97%); mp 130–130.5 ꢂC.
(film):
g
¼3294, 3072, 2923, 2854, 1748, 1663, 1534, 1466, 1438,
1368, 1222, 1138, 1036, 983, 908, 835, 800, 720, 600, 559 cmꢀ1. 1H
NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) ( ): 7.63–7.62 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.13–7.03
d
(1H, m, amide NH), 5.29–5.17 (2H, m, H-1 and H-3 (sugar)), 5.13
(1H, t, J¼9.2 Hz, H-2 (sugar)), 5.10–5.00 (1H, m, H-5 (sugar)), 4.94–
4.87 (1H, m, H-4 (sugar)), 4.34–4.23 (2H, m, H-6a and H-6b (sugar)),
ESI-MS, MS, m/z: 616 [MꢀOH]þ. IR (film):
g
¼3263, 2956, 2921,
2852, 1673, 1554, 1376, 1081, 1040, 719 cmꢀ1
.
1H NMR (500 MHz,
DMSO-d6) (
amide NH), 4.60–4.53 (1H, m, H-5 (sugar)), 4.19–4.07 (3H, m, H-4,
H-6a, and H-6b (sugar)), 3.63–3.58 (2H, m, 2 -CH (lipid)), 3.16–3.09
(9H, m, 3CH3 (quatern)), 1.83–1.82 (2H, m, -CH2 (lipid)), 1.66–1.65
(2H, m,
-CH2 (lipid)),1.37–1.21 (32H, m, 2ꢃ8CH2 (lipid)), 0.85–0.82
(6H, m, 2CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) (
): 175.5,
d): 7.28–7.21 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.20–7.18 (1H, m,
4.06–4.03 (1H, dd, J¼11.8, 12.0 Hz,
a
-CH (lipid)), 3.79–3.76 (1H, m,
a
-CH (lipid)), 2.01, 1.97, 1.96, 1.98 (12H, 4s, 4CH3CO (sugar)), 1.86–
a
b
1.77 (4H, m, 2
b
-CH2 (lipid)), 1.25–1.21 (32H, m, 2ꢃ8(CH2) (lipid)),
0.86–0.81 (6H, m, 2CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) (
d):
b
172.6, 172.2, 170.8, 170.5, 169.8, 169.7, 169.4, 78.4, 78.1, 78.0, 73.5,
73.4, 72.6, 72.3, 70.7, 70.0, 68.0, 61.5, 53.5, 53.1, 52.6, 31.7, 31.6, 30.5,
29.4, 29.4, 29.4, 29.3, 29.2, 29.1, 29.0, 25.6, 25.5, 25.4, 22.5, 22.2,
20.6, 20.5, 20.4, 19.9, 13.9. HRMS calcd for C38H68N3O11: 742.4854,
found: 742.4850.
d
166.3, 166.1,166.1, 80.5, 80.4, 79.0, 78.8, 77.8, 77.58, 77.44, 77.2, 72.4,
72.2, 70.8, 70.4, 52.1, 51.7, 31.7, 31.6, 29.6, 29.5, 29.4, 29.4, 29.3, 29.2,
29.1, 29.0, 28.9, 26.1, 26.0, 25.8, 25.6, 22.4, 14.3, 14. HRMS calcd
C33H66N3Oþ7: 616.4895, found: 616.4895.
4.2.9. N-[2-(N0-(N00,N00,N00-Trimethyl-
2,3,4,6-tetrahydroxy- -glucopyranosyl amine hydroxide (7a). Com-
L-leucyl)amino-D,L-dodecanoyl)]-
4.3. Isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC)
b-D
ITC measurements were performed at 37 ꢂC. Aliquots of a solu-
tion containing the compound in degassed, deionized water
(pH 6.0) were injected into the microcalorimeter sample cell
(1.4395 mL) loaded with water using a stirrer/syringe rotating at
300 rpm. Sequences were built as follows: title compound con-
centration, 4 mM; number of injections, 30; injection duration,
pound 6a (0.51 g, 0.77 mmol) was dissolved in methanol (30 mL). Ion
exchange resin [Amberlite IRA-400 (ꢀOH)] (8 g) and methyl iodide
(77 mmol, 2.22 mL) were added and the mixture was stirred for 48 h.
The resin was removed by filtration and solvent was evaporated un-
der vacuum to give an oil, which was dissolved in (50 mL) acetoni-
trile/water (1:1) and then lyophilized to give compound 7a (1:1
mixture of diastereomers) as a white powder (0.38 g, 90%); mp 168–
20 s; injection volume, 10
mL. For compounds 7a and 7b, additional
168.5 ꢂC; ESI-MS, m/z: 532 [MꢀOH]þ. IR (film):
g
¼3263, 2924, 1682,
conditions were tested, varying concentrations (4–8 mM), injection
durations (10, 20, 30 s), and volumes (5, 10, 15
ments were performed in triplicate.
1665, 1554, 1079, 1041, 1019, 672 cmꢀ1. 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO) (
d):
mL). All measure-
7.45–7.43 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.29–7.28 (1H, m, amide NH), 5.12–4.98
(2H, m, H-1 and H-3 (sugar)), 4.63 (1H, d, J¼8.7 Hz, H-2 (sugar)), 4.33–
4.24 (1H, m, H-5 (sugar)), 4.21–4.18 (1H, dd, J¼11.8, 10.2 Hz, H-6a
Acknowledgements
(sugar)), 3.73–3.60 (1H, m, H-6b (sugar)), 3.51–3.46 (2H, m,
a-CH
(lipid) and
a
-CH (Leu)), 3.10 (9H, d, J¼5.1 Hz, 3CH3 (quatern)), 1.89–
This work was supported by an ARC Discovery grant
[DP0558334]. We thank Dr. Tri Le for his advice and help on NMR
acquisitions and Graham MacFarlane for accurate mass measure-
ments. A.S.A. gratefully thanks the Egyptian government for fi-
nancial support in forms of a PhD scholarship.
1.84 (1H, m, CH(CH3)2 (Leu)), 1.69–1.62 (2H, m,
b
-CH2 (lipid)), 1.62–
1.34 (2H, m, b-CH2 (Leu)), 1.32–1.21 (16H, m, 8CH2 (lipid)), 0.95–0.87
(6H, m, 2CH3 (Leu)), 0.83 (3H, t, J¼1.1 Hz, CH3 (lipid)). 13C NMR
(500 MHz, DMSO-d6) (d): 171.28, 165.7, 165.5, 80.1, 79.98, 79.0, 78.8,
77.7, 72.6, 72.5, 72.4, 70.3, 70.3, 54.7, 54.7, 52.1, 51.8, 31.6, 31.6, 29.3,
29.3, 29.2, 29.23, 29.06, 29.05, 29.03, 28.9, 28.7, 25.4, 25.2, 24.6, 24.0,
22.4, 21.1, 21.0, 14.3. HRMS calcd for C27H54N3Oþ7: 532.3956, found:
532.3956.
References and notes
1. Borchardt, R. T. J. Controlled Release 1999, 62, 231–238.
2. Mrestani, Y.; Ha¨rtl, A.; Neubert, R. H. H. Int. J. Pharm. 2006, 309, 67–70.
3. Gomez-Orellana, I. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2005, 2, 419–433.
4. Blanchfield, J.; Toth, I. Curr. Med. Chem. 2004, 11, 2375–2382.
5. Asgharnejad, M. In Transport Processes in Pharmaceutical Systems; Amidon, G. L.,
Lee, P. I., Topp, E. M., Eds.; Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, 2000; pp 185–218.
6. Kompella, U. B.; Lee, V. H. L. In Transport Processes in Pharmaceutical Systems;
Amidon, G. L., Lee, P. I., Topp, E. M., Eds.; Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, 2000;
pp 317–375.
7. Ross, B. P.; Braddy, A. C.; McGeary, R. P.; Blanchfield, J. T.; Prokai, L.; Toth, I. Mol.
Pharmacol. 2004, 1, 233–245.
8. Artursson, P.; Palm, K.; Luthman, K. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2001, 46, 27–43.
9. Violette, A.; Cortes, D. A. F.; Bergeon, J. A.; Falconer, R. A.; Toth, I. Int. J. Pharm.
2008, 351, 152–157.
4.2.10. N-[2-(N0-(N00,N00,N00-Trimethyl-
decanoyl)]-2,3,4,6-tetrahydroxy- -glucopyranosyl amine hydroxide
L-phenylalanyl) amino-D,L-do-
b-D
(7b). Compound 7b was prepared following the procedure de-
scribed for compound 7a except using compound 6b (0.55 g,
0.79 mmol) as starting material instead, yielding 7b (1:1 mixture of
diastereomers) as a white powder (0.41 g, 90%); mp 137–137.5 ꢂC;
ESI-MS, m/z: 566 [MꢀOH]þ. IR (film):
g
¼3277, 3062, 2923, 1667,
1544, 1077, 1037, 698 cmꢀ1. 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) (
d
): 7.66–
7.65 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.53–7.47 (1H, m, amide NH), 7.42–7.30
10. Wennerstro¨m, H.; Lindman, B. Phys. Rep. 1979, 52, 1–86.
11. Molina-Bolivar, J. A.; Carnero Ruiz, C. In Self-Assembly and Micellar Structures of
Sugar-Based Surfactants: Effect of Temperature and Salt Addition (Surfactant Sci-
ence Series); Ruiz, C. C., Ed.; CRC: Boca Raton, FL, 2009; pp 61–104.
(5H, m, Ph), 4.60–4.55 (1H, t, J¼12.9 Hz, H-2 (sugar)), 4.42–4.28
(2H, m, H-6a and H-6b (sugar)), 3.96–3.91 (1H, m,
a-CH (lipid)),
3.63–3.59 (1H, m, a-CH (Phe)), 3.36–3.34 (2H, m, CH2Ph), 3.22–3.20

9442
A.S. Abdelrahim et al. / Tetrahedron 65 (2009) 9436–9442
12. Falconer, R. A.; Toth, I. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2007, 15, 7012–7020.
13. Gibbons, W. A.; Hughes, R. A.; Charalambous, M.; Christodoulou, M.; Szeto, A.;
Aulabaugh, A. E.; Mascagni, P.; Toth, I. Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1990, 12, 1175–1183.
14. Maley, G. F.; Lardy, H. A. J. Biol. Chem. 1954, 210, 903–909.
15. Goursaud, F.; Benvegnu, T. Carbohydr. Res. 2009, 344, 136–139.
16. Buchini, S.; Leumann, C. J. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2006, 3152–3168.
17. Farr, R. N.; Kwok, D. I.; Daves, G. D. J. Org. Chem. 1992, 57, 2093–2100.
18. Whitaker, D. R.; Tate, M. E.; Bishop, C. T. Can. J. Chem.-Rev. Can. Chim. 1962, 40,
1885–1889.
28. Buckton G. Interfacial phenomena in drug delivery and targeting. Drug Targeting
Delivery; Florence, A. T., Gregoriadis, G., Eds.; Harwood Academic: Chur, 1995;
Vol. 5.
29. Nakamura, H.; Sano, A.; Matsuura, K. Anal. Sci. 1998, 14, 379–382.
30. Van Os, N. M.; Daane, G. J.; Haandrikman, G. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1991, 141,
199–217.
31. Takeoka, S.; Sou, K.; Boettcher, C.; Fuhrhop, J. H.; Tsuchida, E. J. Chem. Soc.,
Faraday Trans. 1998, 94, 2151–2158.
32. Pfannemueller, B.; Kuehn, I. Makromol. Chem. 1988, 189, 2433–2442.
33. Blanzat, M.; Perez, E.; Rico-Lattes, I.; Prome, D.; Prome, J. C.; Lattes, A. Langmuir
1999, 15, 6163–6169.
19. Skwarczynski, M.; Kiso, Y. Curr. Med. Chem. 2007, 14, 2813–2823.
20. Pathak, V. P. Synth. Commun. 1993, 23, 83–85.
21. Salvatore, R. N.; Yoon, C. H.; Jung, K. W. Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 7785–7811.
22. Sommer, H. Z.; Jackson, L. L. J. Org. Chem. 1970, 35, 1558–1562.
23. Cowling, A. P.; Mann, J.; Usmani, A. A. J. Chem. Soc., PerkinTrans.11981, 2116–2119.
24. Mrestani, Y.; Bretschneider, B.; Hartl, A.; Brandsch, M.; Neubert, R. H. H. J.
Pharm. Pharmacol. 2004, 56, 485–493.
34. Tetko, I. V.; Gasteiger, J.; Todeschini, R.; Mauri, A.; Livingstone, D.; Ertl, P.;
Palyulin, V.; Radchenko, E.; Zefirov, N. S.; Makarenko, A. S.; Tanchuk, V. Y.;
Prokopenko, V. V. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2005, 19, 453–463.
35. Bai, G. Y.; Wang, J. B.; Yan, H. K.; Li, Z. X.; Thomas, R. K. J. Phys. Chem. B 2001, 105,
3105–3108.
25. Oakenfull, D. G.; Fenwick, D. E. Aust. J. Chem. 1973, 26, 2649–2658.
26. Zana, R. In Gemini Surfactants: Synthesis, Interfacial and Solution-Phase Behavior,
and Applications (Surfactant Science Series); Zana, R., Xia, J., Eds.; Marcel Dekker:
New York, NY, 2003; pp 94–108 (and further chapters).
36. Hubbard, A. T. Encyclopedia of Surface and Colloid Science; Marcel Dekker: New
York, NY, 2002; Vol. 3.
37. Marcus, Y. J. Solution Chem. 1987, 16, 735–744.
38. Clint, J. H. Surfactant Aggregation; Chapman and Hall: New York, NY, 1992;
pp 116–118.
27. Eley, J. G.; Triumalashetty, P. AAPS PharmSciTech 2001, 2, 81–87.